California Governor Gavin Newsom tore into Donald Trump over a fast-moving push to deploy military forces into Democratic run cities, calling the move a breathtaking abuse of law and power and warning that America is on the brink of martial law. In a post on X, Newsom urged Americans not to be silent, framing the moment as a constitutional stress test and a political power play that could spill into the streets if left unchecked.
He wrote the following: “This is a breathtaking abuse of the law and power by the President of the United States. America is on the brink of martial law. Do not be silent.”
This is a breathtaking abuse of the law and power by the President of the United States.
America is on the brink of martial law.
Do not be silent. https://t.co/BxWvN1lQT1
— Governor Gavin Newsom (@CAgovernor) October 6, 2025
Newsom’s statement landed as Illinois Governor J. B. Pritzker sounded his own alarm. Pritzker said the Pentagon had authorized a 400-troop deployment from the Texas National Guard to locations in Illinois, Oregon, and other blue states where protests have flared against the administration’s immigration crackdown.
The description from Democratic officials is stark; they view the deployments as an attempt to federalize local unrest and cast immigrant rights demonstrators as a national security threat. Republicans counter that federal facilities and personnel need protection when local leaders will not act.
Legal challenges are already shaping the battlefield. Over the weekend, a federal judge twice ruled against the administration’s efforts to send troops into Portland to protect immigration detention sites from what the White House called domestic terrorists, a claim critics blasted as pure fiction. The decisions created a temporary roadblock and a political flashpoint, and the president’s team immediately appealed, signaling a drawn-out fight over where federal authority ends and state power begins.
Newsom’s message was blunt; he argued that the rush to send soldiers into blue cities is less about safety and more about spectacle, a made-for-TV show of force that chips away at civil liberties while sidelining governors. Do not be silent, he wrote, warning that the real-world consequences would be detrimental if the plan went forward. He tied the moment to a larger pattern, painting the administration’s immigration crackdown as a way to justify extraordinary domestic measures that would have been unthinkable a few years ago.
Pritzker adopted similar language, blasting the notion that outside troops are needed to police Illinois. Chicago officials echoed that stance, saying they will not cede control of city streets to an out-of-state military unit and promising to fight the order in court and in public. The coordinated response from Democratic governors hinted at a broader strategy: meet federal muscle with legal filings, public pressure, and a united front that forces judges to weigh in quickly.
The political stakes are enormous. For Trump’s allies, aggressive deployments are a proof point that the administration will not bend to what they describe as lawless protests. For Democrats, it is a red line; deploying troops into opposition-led states risks normalizing domestic militarization and invites abuses of power that will be hard to unwind. Newsom, who has sparred with Trump for years, is positioning himself as a lead antagonist, placing martial law language at the center of the debate and testing how far the White House is willing to go.
What happens next will hinge on the courts, the governors, and the streets. If judges keep blocking deployments, the plan could fizzle. If green lights appear, expect a rapid escalation of lawsuits, emergency orders, and political fallout.
